Geoffery McPherson v Wicks and Parker Pty Ltd

[2022] FWC 231

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.394 - Application for unfair dismissal remedy

Geoffery McPherson
v

Wicks and Parker Pty Ltd

(U2021/7787)

COMMISSIONER CAMBRIDGE

SYDNEY, 7 FEBRUARY 2022

Application for an unfair dismissal remedy

Despite attempts to have the applicant provide some written advice about this matter, or file a Notice of Discontinuance, they have not done so. Therefore, pursuant to s.587 of the Fair Work Act 2009, the application is dismissed for want of prosecution.

An Order [PR738045] dismissing the matter will be issued concurrently with this Decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Geoffery McPherson has brought a claim for an unfair dismissal remedy against Wicks and Parker Pty Ltd before the Fair Work Commission under section 394 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute arose from an alleged dismissal from employment by Wicks and Parker Pty Ltd. Despite the applicant's initial application for relief, he has not complied with requests to provide written submissions or file a Notice of Discontinuance, leading to the dismissal of the application. Commissioner Cambridge presided over the matter in Sydney on 7 February 2022.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the applicant's failure to provide written advice or file a Notice of Discontinuance warranted dismissal of the application for an unfair dismissal remedy. Given the provisions of section 587 of the Fair Work Act 2009, which allows for the dismissal of applications for want of prosecution when an applicant fails to comply with procedural requirements, the Commission was tasked with determining whether the applicant's inaction justified such a dismissal.

In reaching its decision, the Commission noted the applicant's repeated failure to comply with procedural requirements despite multiple attempts to engage with him. Commissioner Cambridge found that the applicant had not taken any steps to address the deficiencies in his application, and accordingly, the application was dismissed for want of prosecution. The Commission emphasised that the applicant's non-compliance with procedural obligations left no option but to dismiss the application. The Commission's reasoning was grounded in the statutory framework provided by the Fair Work Act 2009, which mandates strict adherence to procedural rules in employment-related claims.

An Order dismissing the matter will be issued concurrently with this decision, formalising the dismissal of the application for an unfair dismissal remedy.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established